A small group of city councilors from the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), accompanied by DPP Legislator Pasuya Yao (姚文智), formed a half circle on Monday morning as they burned reproductions of the Philippine flag and images of Philippine President Benigno Aquino III outside the Manila Economic and Cultural Office (MECO) in Taipei.
Yao and the participants at the small protest were expressing the outrage many Taiwanese feel at the Philippine Coast Guard’s killing of a Taiwanese fisherman on Thursday. They were joined by dozens of members of the 908 Taiwan Republic Alliance, a pro-independence group, who, along with DPP city councilors, lobbed green flippers at the office.
Their anger at the use of indiscriminate force against an unarmed fishing vessel — regardless of whether it indeed crossed into the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone, as Manila claims — was entirely justified, as were their calls on President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration to ensure that the matter is resolved in a just and timely manner.
Since the killing of 65-year-old Hung Shih-cheng (洪石成) onboard the ill-fated Kuang Ta Hsing No. 28, the DPP has been relentless in its criticism of the Ma administration, accusing it of being “slow” and “soft” in its response, and of lacking resolve. It has also called for a more muscular role for the military than what the government has been willing to consider.
One wonders whether the outburst of nationalism and martial spirit is truly intended to resolve the crisis or is simply an attempt to make Ma look bad, no matter what.
It is true that the DPP has not been alone in doing this. Several legislators from Ma’s Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) have sounded like warmongers in the past few days, and other members were present at a protest on Monday during which eggs were lobbed at the building that houses the Philippine representative office.
However, all things considered, the Ma administration has handled the crisis rather well and has managed to strike a balance between several related issues: It has been firm with Manila; it has issued an ultimatum that will expire just as this paper goes to print; it communicated with the US; it involved the navy and reinforced the coast guard; and it warded off attempts at meddling by Beijing.
In a show of both compassion and skillful diplomacy, it even promised to help the family of a Philippine worker seek compensation on Monday after he was killed in a car accident while being driven to Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport, from where he was to be deported for overstaying his visa.
What more would the DPP have the Ma administration do? By going beyond what it has done to date, Taipei would unduly risk escalating tensions with a neighbor and a major source of manpower. Whatever short-term gains might be scored against Ma and the KMT by accusing him of being “soft” on an “arrogant, rude and unreasonable country” — DPP Legislator Chiu Yi-ying’s (邱議瑩) words — are not worth the long-term damage that would be caused to bilateral ties should the situation deteriorate as a result of a more hardline policy in Taipei.
And whatever policy alternatives the DPP might have come up with had it been forced to deal with a similar issue, desecrating another country’s flag during a protest is conduct most unbecoming.
It is a display of nationalism that has no place in a peace-loving country like Taiwan. Members of the DPP should know better than anyone else that such reckless acts are exactly the type of comportment they often deplore among Chinese nationalists across the Taiwan Strait, who have turned such barbarism into a national sport.
Taiwanese have been overwhelmingly even-handed in their response to the incident. The DPP wins nothing by acting like a bully. Cool heads must prevail, at every level.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS